I listened to this talk by Fr John first on YouTube, and then it was removed (presumably for copyright reasons - the YouTube version deleted the "Special Moments in Orthodoxy" bumper). So I was delighted to find this talk archived on this podcast.

Logged

He spoke it as kindly and heartily as could be; as if a man dashed a gallon of cold water in your broth and never doubted you'd like it all the better.

It seems to me that to say that we can say "God the Father" but can't say "God the Holy Spirit" is bordering on, if not is, Monarchianism. I think we have to be very careful in our reaction to the erroneous teaching of the filioque that we don't go to the opposite extreme. Ya know, that who Arius-Nestorius problem.

It seems to me that to say that we can say "God the Father" but can't say "God the Holy Spirit" is bordering on, if not is, Monarchianism. I think we have to be very careful in our reaction to the erroneous teaching of the filioque that we don't go to the opposite extreme. Ya know, that who Arius-Nestorius problem.

It's not Monarchianism. If you listen to Fr Behr's lecture, he points out that the Nicene Creed itself speaks of "one God, the Father", and "one Lord, Jesus Christ", and "the Holy Spirit". It does not say "God the Father", "God the Son", "God the Holy Spirit".

Logged

He spoke it as kindly and heartily as could be; as if a man dashed a gallon of cold water in your broth and never doubted you'd like it all the better.

I understand that. But my problem is with absolutizing this into saying that we cannot make statements that naturally flow from all our theological statements. I still think that the modern insistence of Orthodox theologians on the Monarchy of God the Father is a reaction to the filioque that can be taken too far, such as saying that it is wrong to say God the Holy Spirit. Especially as I've noticed that folks in this thread who defend this position will say God the Son. Doesn't this once again reduce the Holy Spirit to a subordinate position, which is precisely St. Photios' objection to the filioque? But even if we say that "God the..." can only be applied to the Father, I think we still run afoul of St. Photios. The thing that unites the Holy Trinity is that each Person is "God the..."

It's the Akathist to The Holy Spirit in Romanian.It's interesting that it is not available online in English. I searched for it a while ago. It may be in the second volume of a book of akathists published by Jordanville.

If we restrict usage of "God," addressed as a Person, to the Father, I can see how there would be a problem referring to God the anything. When we pray to the Son or the Holy Spirit, we use more words than just "God," as far as I can remember. But, then again, St. Gregory the Theologian says, "When I say God, I mean Father, Son, and Holy Spirit." I can see how modalists can use God the..., but I still don't see how the very use thereof implies modalism. Heresy is lodged not just or only in the word, but in the understanding and meaning.

Anyway, for Slavs, I don't see how this has any meaning since Slavic languages, at least Russian and Ukrainian, (and Georgian, for that matter as well, though it's not Slavic) do not employ articles.

Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt

If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.

Quote from: orthonorm

I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.

It's the Akathist to The Holy Spirit in Romanian.It's interesting that it is not available online in English. I searched for it a while ago. It may be in the second volume of a book of akathists published by Jordanville.

I might be attributing this story to the wrong saint, but I'm 90% sure I'm correct....

A spiritual child of Optina Pustyn came to the monastery with a beautiful, quite costly binding of the Akathist to the Holy Spirit. When St. Moses of Optina was consulted about it, he took it and threw it immediately into the fire and stated that an Akathist to the Holy Spirit was unorthodox and a result of Latin influence. Dunno.

Logged

"If you cannot find Christ in the beggar at the church door, you will not find Him in the chalice.” -The Divine John Chrysostom

“Till we can become divine, we must be content to be human, lest in our hurry for change we sink to something lower.” -Anthony Trollope

It may seem like splitting hairs but this is how heresy develops, when we are not precises in our language.

It's my understanding that the insistence on precision is exactly what got Nestorius into trouble with the Church.

How is that?

Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com

It may seem like splitting hairs but this is how heresy develops, when we are not precises in our language.

It's my understanding that the insistence on precision is exactly what got Nestorius into trouble with the Church.

On the other hand, the most prominent argument at the most famous council in Church history was over a single letter.

Didn't the homoousios vs. homoiousios issue arise after Nicaea?

« Last Edit: October 20, 2010, 10:43:42 PM by deusveritasest »

Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com

Your examples keep proving my point. None of them use the terminology "GOD THE...". Formula such as "Son and God", "Christ our true God" "My God" are all acceptable. When we use "God the..." we are creating separate gods. It is a matter of subject and modifier. I am sorry I am not being clear and explaining this concept well.

So, in your estimation, is the Holy Spirit not fully God? Would it be appropriate to refer to Him as "O Holy Spirit, my Comforter and God"?

Yes the Holy Spirit is fully God, it is its essence and I don't think there is any problem with your above statement. It is a position of attribute. In your above statement you are describing the Holy Spirit as God but in "God the Holy Spirit," God is being described as Holy Spirit, which is incomplete and in turn makes no sense.

Would it be also erroneous to say "God the Father"?

Logged

I stopped posting here in August 2011 because of stark disagreement with the policies of the administration and moderating team of the forums. If you desire, feel free to PM me, message me on Facebook (link in profile), or email me: cddombrowski@gmail.com

I might be attributing this story to the wrong saint, but I'm 90% sure I'm correct....

A spiritual child of Optina Pustyn came to the monastery with a beautiful, quite costly binding of the Akathist to the Holy Spirit. When St. Moses of Optina was consulted about it, he took it and threw it immediately into the fire and stated that an Akathist to the Holy Spirit was unorthodox and a result of Latin influence. Dunno.

I don't think that was an akathist to the Holy Spirit, but one to the Father. There is a legit akathist to the Holy Spirit, as well as many, many canons and prayers for Him in the services of the Church.

Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt

If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.

Quote from: orthonorm

I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.